There are just two Division-1 programs suiting up in the state of Michigan, and this year they have a two-year low of opponents in common, with just two. Let’s take a look at Michigan and Detroit and break down who’s getting the best (and worst) of it.
Common Opponents
Fewer than last year – when Wolverines and Titans
| Team | Michigan | Detroit |
|---|---|---|
| Bellarmine | Away, Feb. 16 | Away, March 3 |
| Ohio State | Home, April 13 | Away, Feb. 9 |
| Head-to-Head | @ Michigan | April 17 |
Michigan has the advantage against common opponents. Obviously the head-to-head (not technically a common opponent) is in Ann Arbor, and the Wolverines also have Ohio State in the Big House, whereas the Titans are away for all three.
Others
Comparing strength
| Michigan Opp. | 2012 TFL Pyth (Rank) | Detroit Opp. | 2012 TFL Pyth (Rank) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Penn State | .6057 (20) | Navy | .5341 (26) |
| Johns Hopkins | .7825 (4) | Robert Morris | .5422 (25) |
| Army | .5689 (24) | Quinnipiac | .2177 (57) |
| High Point | N/A | Marist | .3527 (44) |
| Hobart | .4317 (36) | VMI | .2278 (55) |
| Fairfield | .5775 (23) | Jacksonville | .4097 (38) |
| Colgate | .7128 (13) | Manhattan | .2196 (56) |
| Loyola | .8301 (2) | Siena | .6276 (18) |
| Air Force | .5213 (29) | Marquette | N/A |
| Delaware | .5169 (30) | Canisius | .2649 (51) |
| St. Joseph’s | .2892 (48) | ||
| Denver | .7512 (8) | ||
| Avg. | .5989 (22)* | Avg. | .3774 (41)* |
* Average schedule ranked as hypothetical team with that pyth win% in 2012.
Michigan’s schedule looks much stronger on its face. A big part of the is due to participating in the ECAC, as opposed to the MAAC. The non-conference schedules (including the head-to-head and common games) look a bit better: Michigan’s – .5370 Detroit’s – .4223.
Michigan’s first-year opponent, High Point, is likely to be far weaker than Detroit’s, a Marquette team that actually played very well in fall ball. Still, the Wolverines’ overall schedule comes in much tougher than the Titans’, and should be no easy stream to navigate for the second-year program.
High Point looks to be improved (from the Fall) with the addition of their two transfers (a former UVA goalie and a former Rutgers midfielder). So perhaps that’s a change to “weaker” from “far weaker”?
Marquette smacked High Point in the fall, and they had a comfortable win over a Robert Morris squad that wasn’t bad last year. Sure, High Point may improve between then and the start of the season, but I’m willing to believe Marquette will actually field a pretty competitive team this year. High Point, I’ll have to see it before I’m convinced.
We must be very careful to not assign too much worth to Fall Ball. Coaches need to see their new players in competition. Different teams can have different objectives for a fall game. Sure they would prefer to win and will try to win but the confidence in data from fall scrimmages should not be high.
Yeah, but word is that Marquette has built with transfers and Canadians, in stark contrast to how High Point did it (or Michigan, for that matter). Most people believe Marquette will be a lot better than a typical start-up in year one, a lot like Jacksonville in their first year. The trick will be building a sustainable program.